William Morris

The Royal Tombs in Westminster Abbey

For some time past there have been rumours afloat that it was intended to `restore'
the Royal tombs in Westminster Abbey. These seem traceable to the fact that the
President of the Society of Antiquaries had had his attention called to the alleged
bad condition of the monuments. The result of this has been that Mr J. T.
Micklethwaite, whose knowledge both of the past and the present of the Abbey
probably surpasses that of any other person now living, was commissioned to report
on the state of the Royal monuments to the executive committee of the Society of
Antiquaries. His report disposes of the alarmist view that there is any serious
deterioration going on in these monuments. They have indeed suffered from the
effects of violence that took place during the civil and ecclesiastical strife of
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; and they are worn by time and London
filth; but the Dean and Chapter cannot justly be blamed for any neglect of them, as
they have done what they could to keep them in a condition at once sound and
genuine.

It is possible, however, that the rumour above mentioned may lead to a cry for
their `restoration,' in the technical sense of the word. I ask permission,
therefore, to address a word or two, though your columns, to those who are not
contented to see these invaluable records of severalcenturies of our history, these
beautiful examples of a past art, left in a sound and genuine condition.

I fear there are those who wish to change the present appearance of these
monuments, who believe that it is possible to bring them back to their original
splendour. They would, no doubt, replace the vanished mosaic in the twisted columns
of the Confessor's shrine, replace the partly perished marble by brand-new slabs;
do the same by the Purbeck marble of Queen Eleanor's tomb, and polish the new work
till it shone like glass (for such things have been done elsewhere); make new lions
for Edward III's feet to rest on; regild Richard II, and re-chase the crowned and
chained hart and the sunburst which makes such a beautiful pattern on his robe, and
(why not when once started on such a road?) cover the wooden core of Henry V with
new metal, and make a new head for him at a guess. It is a matter of course that
all the architectural details of canopies and subsidiary figures would be done
again, in imitation or guess-work of what yet remains. All this could be done by
means of the expenditure of money, and it will be done if the `restorers' have
their way; for they will not stop short of it. And what would be the result of it?
We should have a set of models more or less ingeniously got together, partly by
servile and inartistic imitation, partly by guess-work from the originals. Such
models might, indeed, be made for exhibition in some popular show, some Old
Westminster yet to be produced, and might amuse a good many people for a time, and
they would be innocent enough if the originals were left in their integrity. But
that is not the possible proposition; the `restorers' would try their experiments
on the very historical records and works of art themselves; which means, in plain
words, that before `restoring' them they would have to destroy them. The recordof
our remembered history embodied in them would be gone; almost more serious still,
the unremembered history, wrought into them by the hands of the craftsmen of bygone
times, would be gone also. And to what purpose? To foist a patch of bright, now
work, a futile academical study at best, amidst the loveliness of the most
beautiful building in Europe.

I cannot and do not believe that the Dean and Chapter would consent to the
perpetuation of such a monstrosity, but I feel that it is well to be in time in
such matters and to protest before any considerable number of persons should get
themselves committed to a scheme, the carrying out of which would be nothing short
of a national disaster.